Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rangoon11 (talk | contribs) at 16:44, 5 October 2010 (→October 2010: response). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, Rangoon11! Welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions to this 💕. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Jojhutton (talk) 13:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: Edit a page • Upload and use images • Create your first article Intuitive guide to Misplaced Pages • Article Creation Wizard Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Help desk: A Wiki Styled page to ask questions on Help directory: A comprehensive list-style help contents page Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Misplaced Pages is not • Biographies of living persons List of policies • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • List of guidelines Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Simplified manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Peer review • Featured content Miscellaneous User pages • Talk pages Awards a registered contributor can achieve and award Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

League Tables of British Universities 2010

Stop changing an article about league tables! You have already considerable contributions and almost became the dominant editor. As I can see from your talk page, it's not the first case of violating the rules of Misplaced Pages 188.223.81.158 (talk) 12:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on League tables of British universities. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Codf1977 (talk) 12:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Not for the first time you have immediately assumed bad faith on my part and immediately been threatening towards me.

I have been attempting to discuss edits to League tables of British universities with 188.223.81.158, as you can see from the history of that page. At first 188.223.81.158 refused to go on the talk page at all, and then they simply posted a two line attack on me there but made no further effort to constructively discuss the issues at hand.

Am I supposed to just let 188.223.81.158 introduce clear POV and original research into League tables of British universities whilst being unwilling to discuss these?Rangoon11 (talk) 13:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I have made no assumptions of Good or Bad faith on either yours or 188.223.81.158 part, you are both clearly engaged in a edit war on League tables of British universities - the WP:3RR rule is a bright line one, if after your third revert, the other editor still caries on then you report them to WP:AN3 and leave it to an administrator to resolve, if you believe that the editor has introduces POV material, it is NOT a revert to tag the article {{POV}} (as long as you do not war over the template or you are re-adding it).. Codf1977 (talk) 13:13, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Agreed but I would much prefer to discuss the edits with 188.223.81.158 rather than report them to an administrator. I have left a response on the talk page for League tables of British universities and hope that 188.223.81.158 will now respond with something constructive. In meantime I will leave their edits as is.Rangoon11 (talk) 13:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Ragoon11, I responded to your comments on the Discussion page of League tables of British universities on 29 September 2010. Please have a look and let me know your opinion. 188.223.81.158 (talk) 15:58, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

UCL Institute of Neurology

Either provide the ref's as per Misplaced Pages:College and university article guidelines or this is going to end up at AfD Codf1977 (talk) 11:25, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I entered two third-party citations on 20 September, straight after you originally tagged the page as not being notable. One of the links is to the Brain Research Trust, a independent charity. I quote from their site 'Since it was founded in 1971, the BRT has been supporting University College London’s Institute of Neurology (IoN), one of the world’s leading centres for neurological research.'

I will repeat again the uncontentious and undisputed facts about the institute:

*1. It has a staff of around 500.

*2. It has an annual turnover of £33 million.

*3. It receives over £19 million per annum in research grants and currently holds over 250 active grants.

*4. In the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise almost 100 institute staff were submitted for evaluation and 70% of research was deemed to be internationally competitive or world leading.

*5. It occupies around 6,451 sq m of laboratory and office space.

*6. Four of the top twelve most highly-cited authors in neuroscience and behaviour in the world are currently based at the institute.

*7. It is the most important part of UCL Neuroscience, which is the second largest university-based neuroscience grouping in the world.

*8. The institute was an independent organisation for almost five decades before joining UCL, and that independent existence alone justifies an article.

*9. The institute operates a joint library with the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, the Rockefeller Medical Library, which is the recognised Library for Neurology within the University of London.

*10. The institute has had a major textbook written about its work.

*11. The institute is an important part of UCL, a very large and high-profile university variously ranked 4th, 21st and 22nd in the world this year.

*12. The work of the institute is very closely associated (and essentially inseperable) with that of the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, which is beyond question also the most important institution of its kind in the UK and probably Europe

As I have noted before, point 8 alone justifies an article. The institute was in existence for five decades before merging with UCL, and that independent existence justifies an article. Rangoon11 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

You need to show that by using reliable Sources that are independent of UCL. Point 8 does not justify it, after many commercial mergers and acquisition pages are merged. 11:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Once again, you have completely failed to respond in any detail to my comments. Regarding point 8, firstly this is not a company but a higher education institution. Secondly, if the article was deleted the history of the institute would be lost from Misplaced Pages, since it would be inappropriate to add such detail to either the University College London or the UCL Faculty of Biomedical Sciences articles. Thirdly, company articles are not always merged following a merger, takeover or other change of corporate structue, it very much depends on the circumstance, see Cadbury plc, Abbey National, Rolls-Royce Limited, Imperial Chemical Industries, BTR plc, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company, Pilkington, The BOC Group, Asda, British Energy, Lattice Group and many others.Rangoon11 (talk) 12:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

As a further point, please can we keep discussion on the topic on the Talk:UCL Institute of Neurology page so that others can see the full talk history on this topic, particularly as you are so keen to post messages about the article on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Universities. Thanks.Rangoon11 (talk) 12:09, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

October 2010

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you remove the maintenance templates from Misplaced Pages articles, as you did to University College London, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. The Tags at the top of the University College London page relate to the presentation of your so called facts, there is far to much on the academic rankings to the point of promotion and this is contra to policy and guidelines.

Please also remember WP:3RR. Codf1977 (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Codf1977 you clearly have an issue both with me and with UCL, that is now very clear from your persistent aggressive behaviour, which I would now have to describe as harassment. Not only are you not neutral in respect of either UCL or me, you are actively hostile. Please familiarise yourself with this page Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and do not make any contact with me again. Rangoon11 (talk) 16:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC)